Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / This qualitative dissertation contributes to the nascent literature on the study of social enterprise in American congregations through an examination of the role, theology, motivations, and experiences of Protestant Christian social entrepreneurs who are pursuing (or have pursued) social entrepreneurship in the congregational setting. These religious leaders engage the free market by establishing social ventures such as hotels, thrift stores, community development corporations, restaurants, retail outlets, publishing companies, and landscaping businesses among others. Drawing on forty-four in-depth, semi-structured interviews with lay and clergy leaders representing a diverse sample of twenty-six American congregations from four Protestant traditions and six geographic regions, this dissertation asks: Who are these congregational social entrepreneurs (their role and their theology)? Why do they engage in congregational social entrepreneurship (motivations)? And how do they go about establishing social ventures (experiences)? This study provides scholars and practitioners insights into the identity, motivations, and experiences of American religious leaders who are pioneering an emerging form of religious practice that blurs the distinction between the pastor and parishioner, the sacred and secular, and the instrumental and expressive. This dissertation offers contributions to both theory and practice. Instead of conceptualizing “social entrepreneurship” and “values and faith” as separate categories (as in prior research), this dissertation introduces a new theoretical paradigm with an intersecting model of instrumental and expressive rationales for nonprofit institutions. Transcending otherwise clearly defined boundaries, the study’s findings speak to the flexibility of social entrepreneurship to conform to the values of its leadership and the pervasive and permeating reach of faith within the context of human endeavor. Additionally, this research offers a constructive understanding of the role, theological tenets, and practical experiences of lay and clergy leaders. / 2021-08-21

abstract: This research examined the perceptions of refugees towards social entrepreneurship in Arizona through focus group discussions with 77 members of the refugee communities that have been organized under nine groups. Business experience, problem solving experience, conception of social entrepreneurship, examples, opportunities, support, and needs emerged as the themes of the study. Available opportunities as well as barriers for refugee social entrepreneurship based on the views of refugees in Arizona were explained. The difference between commercial entrepreneurship and social entrepreneurship was highlighted and some examples of refugee social entrepreneurship described. Qualitative data analysis revealed that refugees in Arizona have entrepreneurial characteristics such as risk taking, hardworking, problem solving, and determination. They also have a good understanding of commercial entrepreneurship but very little understanding of social entrepreneurship. The findings underlined that social entrepreneurship can be used as a helpful strategy for self-sufficiency of refugees residing in Arizona. Given their life trajectories, refugees in Arizona have high potential to be social entrepreneurs with the right exposure and training. If supported adequately and planned appropriately, the refugee social entrepreneurship project can lead to self-sufficiency and faster integration of participating individuals to the mainstream society. The findings may spark interest among practitioners, policy makers, and scholars. It may redefine refugee social work practices as the passion of enterprising empowers refugees and helps them to discover self-confidence and rebrand their image. Policy makers may consider incorporating refugee social entrepreneurship in to the current self-sufficiency plan for refugee resettlement. Future research needs to investigate how refugee social entrepreneurs can be successful and focus on the measurement of their success. / Dissertation/Thesis / Masters Thesis Social Work 2015

Increasingly, developed countries' markets, which are usually characterized by wealthy customers, are getting saturated. This has necessitated that multinational corporations (MNCs) seek new solutions for their future growth and profitability. One of the markets that has attracted the attention of MNCs is the bottom of the economic pyramid (BOP), which comprises four billion people. However, reaching this market, characterized as having a low income of less than $2 a day, is not easily achievable. Corporations have to revisit their prior business models and develop winwin solutions that serve the needs of the poor and create profits. To conceptualize the market-based initiatives of MNCs at the BOP, this research employs the concept of corporate social entrepreneurship (CSE). CSE is defined in this research as the process of innovatively identifying and exploiting social opportunities in large and established organizations with the aim of creating economic and social value. The research questions that this dissertation seeks to answer are concerned with exploring the antecedents and outcomes of CSE. First, built upon three related strands of literature - social entrepreneurship, corporate entrepreneurship and corporate social responsibility - this research attempts to provide a preliminary understanding of the potential antecedents and outcomes of CSE. Then, by employing multiple qualitative and exploratory case studies, CSE and its antecedents and outcomes are empirically investigated in eight multinational companies in India. The research identifies demand conditions and stakeholder expectations as the environmental factors that predict CSE. Three organizational characteristics - management support, a network orientation towards social sector organizations, and the availability of financial resources - are also found to be determining factors. The outcomes are identified associal value creation, long-term profitability and legitimacy. These antecedents and outcomes are theoretically explained and supported by contingency theory, the contingent resource-based view and stakeholder theory.

Social entrepreneurship, which can be described as the application of market-based approaches to societal and/or environmental problems, represents a collision between good intentions and the pursuit of profitability. Nearly two decades ago, the democratically elected African National Congress inherited a country in crisis. Neoliberal policies have since promoted the role of the private sector in economic and social development in South Africa. Entrepreneurship is seen as a tool to stimulate poverty alleviation, address staggering unemployment rates and integrate blacks into the mainstream economy. Municipalities are increasingly turning to alternative service delivery, privatization and public-private partnerships to address service delivery crises. Moving beyond traditional methodological approaches of individual case studies, this research adopts a holistic analysis of the recycling sector, which allows reflections on the state and implications of (social) entrepreneurial approaches. Particularly, this research is concerned with the opportunities and limitations afforded by entrepreneurial approaches, including the extent to which contextual variables are acknowledged and unequal power dynamics are challenged or further entrenched. Grounded in entrepreneurship and business theory, this research also pulls from waste management literature, global development, critical and gender studies. Various methodological inquires are undertaken, including structured and semi-structured interviews of participants of recycling initiatives and management of sector organizations, content analysis, and the facilitation of a Recycling Forum. Findings suggest that while there are some opportunities, (social) entrepreneurial approaches are significantly hindered by a lack of acknowledgement of contextual variables and critical investigation into the institutional structures and biases that create particular gendered entrepreneurial spaces. Initiatives risk entrenching apartheid-era inequalities and further disadvantaging the most vulnerable through the creation of competition. The emphasis on recycling deflects efforts from more immediate or hazardous challenges and is insufficient to challenge market inequalities. Moving beyond a guise of good intentions, social entrepreneurship is suggested as a reflective and iterative process that promotes greater self-awareness of one’s impact on the existing value chain, power dynamics and social justice. / Thesis (Master, Environmental Studies) -- Queen's University, 2013-09-20 21:17:33.868

(no abstract available)

Com a ambiciosa missão de resolver problemas sociais, os negócios de impacto estão crescendo cada vez mais no Brasil e no mundo. A fim de responder como o investidor de impacto toma decisões sobre sua carteira, o presente estudo tem como objetivo investigar a forma como o investidor lida com o fator de impacto, além da relação risco e retorno, tradicionalmente utilizada pelos investidores. Utilizou-se metodologia de natureza exploratória qualitativa, sendo os resultados estudados por meio da análise de conteúdo. A coleta de dados foi realizada por meio de entrevistas semiestruturadas realizadas junto a dez organizações da área de investimento de impacto que juntas representam cerca de 75% dos ativos sob gestão no Brasil. Para analisar os dados, foram identificadas as escalas, com intervalo de 1 até 5, atribuídas para cada um dos fatores que compõem um investimento de impacto: risco, retorno e impacto. Para retorno financeiro, foi encontrado que os investidores esperam retornos próximos ou acima das taxas de mercado, da mesma maneira que o exigido por investidores tradicionais, no intervalo da escala aplicada, obteve-se 3,778 para o fator analisado retorno financeiro. Com relação ao risco, por meio desta pesquisa encontrou-se que, ao investimento de impacto, agrega-se o risco de não ocorrer impacto, além do risco financeiro já conhecido tradicionalmente. Os investidores de impacto apresentam mais maturidade na escala para risco financeiro, apresentando um resultado na média de 3,667 e ao mesmo tempo para o risco de não atingir impacto ao grau de 3,778. Por serem os fatores risco e retorno uma relação já tradicionalmente conhecida pelos investidores, notou-se que as organizações tendem a apresentar maior maturidade no entendimento destas. Para o mais novo fator impacto, calculou-se 3,000 na média. Diante disto, apurou-se uma oportunidade de evolução no tema por parte dos investidores, com um caminho a ser percorrido em busca da maturidade no tema, principalmente no que tange à preocupação com a blindagem da missão, seja na formalização deste compromisso em documentos ou na implementação de mecanismos de remuneração por atingimento de objetivos de impacto. Os resultados obtidos elucidam importantes questões da área de investimentos de impacto demonstrando que há muita oportunidade de desenvolver o tema no Brasil, em busca da maturidade de alinhamento com práticas adotadas por outros países. / With an audacious mission to get resources to businesses that solve social problems, impact investors are growing in Brazil and in the world. To answer that question of how impact investors decide over their investment portfolio, considering the factor risk, return and impact, this study aims to investigate impact investor and the way he handles with impact factor beyond risk and return relationship, traditionally know by the market. It was used a qualitative exploratory methodology which results were studied through content analysis to reach the proposed objectives. Through semi-structured interviews close to 10 organization of impact investment ecosystem, with a sample that represents at least 75% of assets under management in Brazil, were identified scales (built from 1 to 5) assigned to each decision factor that compound an impact investment: risk, return and impact. For return, the main aspect identified is about expected financial return; adjust to market taxes, as much as expected in traditional investments. It was obtained an average result of 3,778 in financial return, in a scale from 1 to 5. In relation to risk, in impact investments must be observe also the risk of not achieving the expected impact, in addition to financial risk already know in traditional financial market. Impact investors are willing to take risks in this type of investments, since the financial risk factor average obtained in the interviews were 3,667 at the same time they feel prepare to face risk of not achieving desired impact, represented by an average of 3,778. It were noticed that factors risk and return achieved higher averages, a justification for that can be this relationship be traditionally know by investor so they tend to present a greater knowledge on these subjects. To the recent factor impact, it was find out an evolution in the theme, with a long way to go in search of maturity, mainly to influence mission lock, in formalization of this commitment in documents or in the implementation of mechanism to remunerate by impact achievement of objectives. For impact, it was calculated an average of 3,000 in a scale of 1 to 5. The obtained results clarify important questions of impact investment ecosystem demonstrating that there is many opportunities to develop the theme in Brazil, in a search of maturity with adopted practices in other countries.

Thesis advisor: Eve Spangler / Social enterprises are nonprofit, for-profit or hybrid organizations that use business methods to create social change (Dees 2007; Light 2005; Martin and Osberg 2007; Neck, Brush, and Allen 2009;). If it succeeds, the social enterprise model could prove to be a viable pathway to greater social justice in an era of decreasing funding for government services and nonprofits (Emerson and Twersky 1996; Harding 2004; Murphy and Coombs 2009; Wilson 2008). However, skeptics worry that the perils of privatization, bottom-line thinking, and deceptive marketing potentially embodied by the “business methods” that social enterprises employ may undermine the potential of this new approach to solving social problems (Bateman and Chang 2012; Farmer 2009; Nega and Schneider 2014). The three articles that make up this dissertation examined the ways social entrepreneurs perceived and managed tensions between social mission and market institutional logics. Their ability (or lack thereof) to reconcile these contradictory imperatives could contribute to whether social enterprises ultimately succeed or fail as vehicles for positive social change. Social Entrepreneurs at the Crossroads: Four Approaches to Responding to Dual Institutional Logics suggests that the widely accepted characterization of social entrepreneurs as compassionate individuals motivated to address intractable social problems innovatively (Alvord, Brown and Letts 2004; Lehner and Germak 2014; Mair and Marti 2006; Miller, Grimes, McMullen and Vogus 2012) is simplistic. From in-depth interviews with twenty (inter)nationally recognized social entrepreneurs I derived four distinct categories: Disillusioned Dreamers, Social Capitalists, Do-Somethings, and Bridgebuilders. Half of these respondents did not perceive tensions between logics; another quarter did not wrestle with the tensions they perceived. Only the Bridgebuilders perceived tensions and then persisted in focusing on both logics and sets of actors to harness synergies. As a result, only Bridgebuilders offer a truly hybrid model for social mission work within the current economic context, whereas the others hew toward a single dominant logic. One Size Does Not Fit All: Legal Form and US WISEs focuses on work integration social enterprises (WISEs), organizations that address the chronic unemployment of marginalized populations. The data demonstrated that contrary to the expectation that WISEs would exemplify “contested” organizations (Besharov and Smith 2014), eight of the ten WISEs studied did not experience significant conflict between social mission and market logics. Rather, WISEs generally had one logic that dominated their operations: a market logic in for-profit WISEs and a social mission logic in nonprofit WISEs. Workers’ employability emerged as an important variable, with for-profit WISEs creating jobs for more employable populations and nonprofits offering job training and “wraparound” services to harder-to-employ populations. Only two WISEs experienced substantial tensions, when social entrepreneurs attempted to prioritize a job training/services mission within a for-profit form. This data demonstrates that a job creation approach aligns best with a for-profit WISE form and a job training/services approach to a nonprofit WISE form. However, neither form has succeeded in creating a system-transforming model that successfully combines revenue generation with a robust training/services/job creation mission. This suggests that breaking traditional nonprofit and for-profit patterns to deliver substantial market and social mission outcomes within a single organization is a significant challenge. Stakeholder Resistance to Social Enterprise Hybridity examines how social entrepreneurs perceive the support of key stakeholders in their attempts to balance competing social mission and market logics. Despite evidence of social interest in ethical capitalism, this data suggests that well-resourced stakeholders push social entrepreneurs to prioritize price, revenue generation, and measurement. This includes both traditional organizational stakeholders and hybrid-specific stakeholders. Customers and clients demanded low prices and high value. Donors demanded quantification and impact measurement. Investors expected market rate financial return. Finally, social enterprise gatekeeper organizations (fellowship granting bodies) were focused on the market logic characteristics of sustainability, scale, and entrepreneurial ability, pushing the field toward market logic modes of operating. Social entrepreneurs generally responded by acquiescing to pressure to emphasize a market logic in their interactions. Counter to current literature that suggests social entrepreneurs should problem-solve to avoid single logic dominance, social entrepreneurs generally allowed price, business strategy, competition and measurement to shape their interactions with stakeholders. Given the importance of stakeholder buy-in for organizational legitimacy, the field of social enterprise needs to find a way to create and capture stakeholder support for dual logics rather than depending on individual social entrepreneurs to withstand the push toward marketization. Overall, despite persistent efforts at creative solutions to social problems by some individuals, the research shows a strong undertow for social enterprises to adopt business logics and business models. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2016. / Submitted to: Boston College. Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Sociology.

This dissertation focuses on three different organizational approaches to introducing change in the Global South. In so doing, it explores how organizations can design and structure 'solutions' for deep-rooted social problems and support marginalized groups who lack voice to speak for themselves. Theoretically, I draw on institutional theory and social movement theory, and it is to these perspectives that my research seeks to contribute. Empirically, my work focuses on Tanzania, Indonesia and Nigeria. Studying how and why three different types of organizational forms - including a social enterprise (Paper 1), a quasi-social movement (Paper 2) and a social movement (Paper 3) - succeeded or failed in their attempts to introduce change in the Global South provides an intriguing opportunity to build new theoretical insights and to shed light on strategic and organizational processes about which relatively little is known.

Com a ambiciosa missão de resolver problemas sociais, os negócios de impacto estão crescendo cada vez mais no Brasil e no mundo. A fim de responder como o investidor de impacto toma decisões sobre sua carteira, o presente estudo tem como objetivo investigar a forma como o investidor lida com o fator de impacto, além da relação risco e retorno, tradicionalmente utilizada pelos investidores. Utilizou-se metodologia de natureza exploratória qualitativa, sendo os resultados estudados por meio da análise de conteúdo. A coleta de dados foi realizada por meio de entrevistas semiestruturadas realizadas junto a dez organizações da área de investimento de impacto que juntas representam cerca de 75% dos ativos sob gestão no Brasil. Para analisar os dados, foram identificadas as escalas, com intervalo de 1 até 5, atribuídas para cada um dos fatores que compõem um investimento de impacto: risco, retorno e impacto. Para retorno financeiro, foi encontrado que os investidores esperam retornos próximos ou acima das taxas de mercado, da mesma maneira que o exigido por investidores tradicionais, no intervalo da escala aplicada, obteve-se 3,778 para o fator analisado retorno financeiro. Com relação ao risco, por meio desta pesquisa encontrou-se que, ao investimento de impacto, agrega-se o risco de não ocorrer impacto, além do risco financeiro já conhecido tradicionalmente. Os investidores de impacto apresentam mais maturidade na escala para risco financeiro, apresentando um resultado na média de 3,667 e ao mesmo tempo para o risco de não atingir impacto ao grau de 3,778. Por serem os fatores risco e retorno uma relação já tradicionalmente conhecida pelos investidores, notou-se que as organizações tendem a apresentar maior maturidade no entendimento destas. Para o mais novo fator impacto, calculou-se 3,000 na média. Diante disto, apurou-se uma oportunidade de evolução no tema por parte dos investidores, com um caminho a ser percorrido em busca da maturidade no tema, principalmente no que tange à preocupação com a blindagem da missão, seja na formalização deste compromisso em documentos ou na implementação de mecanismos de remuneração por atingimento de objetivos de impacto. Os resultados obtidos elucidam importantes questões da área de investimentos de impacto demonstrando que há muita oportunidade de desenvolver o tema no Brasil, em busca da maturidade de alinhamento com práticas adotadas por outros países. / With an audacious mission to get resources to businesses that solve social problems, impact investors are growing in Brazil and in the world. To answer that question of how impact investors decide over their investment portfolio, considering the factor risk, return and impact, this study aims to investigate impact investor and the way he handles with impact factor beyond risk and return relationship, traditionally know by the market. It was used a qualitative exploratory methodology which results were studied through content analysis to reach the proposed objectives. Through semi-structured interviews close to 10 organization of impact investment ecosystem, with a sample that represents at least 75% of assets under management in Brazil, were identified scales (built from 1 to 5) assigned to each decision factor that compound an impact investment: risk, return and impact. For return, the main aspect identified is about expected financial return; adjust to market taxes, as much as expected in traditional investments. It was obtained an average result of 3,778 in financial return, in a scale from 1 to 5. In relation to risk, in impact investments must be observe also the risk of not achieving the expected impact, in addition to financial risk already know in traditional financial market. Impact investors are willing to take risks in this type of investments, since the financial risk factor average obtained in the interviews were 3,667 at the same time they feel prepare to face risk of not achieving desired impact, represented by an average of 3,778. It were noticed that factors risk and return achieved higher averages, a justification for that can be this relationship be traditionally know by investor so they tend to present a greater knowledge on these subjects. To the recent factor impact, it was find out an evolution in the theme, with a long way to go in search of maturity, mainly to influence mission lock, in formalization of this commitment in documents or in the implementation of mechanism to remunerate by impact achievement of objectives. For impact, it was calculated an average of 3,000 in a scale of 1 to 5. The obtained results clarify important questions of impact investment ecosystem demonstrating that there is many opportunities to develop the theme in Brazil, in a search of maturity with adopted practices in other countries.

The purpose of this research was to find out what Social Value is, how it is created and in what way it is related to Social Entrepreneurship. The study has been done at a time when the concept of Social Entrepreneurship has come to the forefront at the outset of the 21st Century; in an advent of rapid change and worldwide turmoil; yet an academic understanding of Social Entrepreneurship has been lacking. A Western-style capitalist economy has a highly functioning 'for-profit' and government regulatory system, with civil society which carries an obligation to have regard for those who 'have not.' The goodness-of-fit between all three sectors determines the harmony, order and satisfaction of a given population. We now know that social Value is created when communities are impacted with outcomes from the inspiration and perspiration of Social Entrepreneurs and Support teams who are committed to alleviating human need. Social Entrepreneurs and their teams have a different outlook on life. They live with a lack of financial security, are time-poor, persevering, and resourceful; and they manage risk even as need is being resourced. Based upon a robust literature of Entrepreneurship and Values theories for meaning, data collection allowed for ten social ventures to be casestudied. These lead to further enquiry into seven peak bodies designed to be resourcing agencies. This research is important because a model has been developed which effectively enables social ventures to service their mission, and to stay viable. As a result of this, a way forward has been identified where the impact from social entrepreneuring becomes a core determinant of created Social Value. The contribution of this research has been to lay a foundation in grassroots social entrepreneurship which is supported by a Literature which others following can add to or further define. There is now something comprehensive drawn from the experiences of many in the field uipon which to base further enquiry and future investigation. Suggestions have also been made which need reinforcing at the Public Policy level; others in the Social Policy sector will want to know the way to reengineer a way out of the 'gap' which exists in the Capitalist System.